Donald L. Tuttle, William L. Wilbur, A Multivariate Time-Series Investigation of Annual Returns on Highest Grade Corporate Bonds, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 6, No. 2 (Mar., 1971), pp. 707-721

Managerial decision making, Budget adaptiveness, Budget Tightness

Markowitz [12] and Tobin [19] pioneered in the development of a portfolio selection model resting on the assumptions that the investor1. Chooses among alternative investment opportunities solely on the basis of expected return (E) and standard deviation of return 〈σ〉, and2. Prefers more expected return to less but will refuse to incur additional risk (measured by standard deviation) unless compensated by increased expected return.

This article has described a technique for evaluating intercorporate performance using risk, return, and trend. By regressing risk and trend on return for a large number of companies, an average performance plane has been established. A company's performance is measured by determining its position relative to the plane.

Auditing, Job satisfaction, Maslow's theory, Motivation

C-V-P Analysis, Uncertainty, Cost-volume-product Analysis, Volume changes

I. Introduction, 262. — II. The economic environment, 263. — III. Mechanics of planning, 265. — IV. Material reserves, 266. — V. Plan formulation and material balances. 267. — VI. Effects of uncertainty, 268. — VII. Plan execution and the costs of incorrect planning, 270. — VIII. Short- and long-term plans, 272. — IX. Optimal planning and dynamics programming, 273. — X. Sensitivity analysis, 276. — XI. Concluding remarks, 278. — Appendix: Proof of the form of an optimal policy, 278.

I. The data and the models, 645. — II. The results of cross-section equations, 646. — III. Residuals from group regressions, 659. — IV. Over time variation, 660. — V. Balanced versus unbalanced growth, 662. — VI. Conclusions, 666.

TO AN ECONOMIST the study of economic development is in large part an investigation into the mechanics of capital formation. At least in theory, the output options open to a developing economy are more restricted in the case where possibilities for obtaining foreign exchange via trade or aid are relatively limited. Society's menu of choices is even easier to enumerate if it is further assumed that labor is surplus in the sense that labor supply is a non-binding constraint on economic development now and for some time to come. These conditions are roughly descriptive of the historical situation confronting some large underdeveloped nations wishing to industrialize rapidly; the U.S.S.R. in the thirties is a classic example. In such situations the key to economic growth is the capacity of the domestic capital goods sector. Increasing that capacity by ploughing back a high proportion of investment goods for purposes of self-reproduction will permit high consumption levels eventually, but not just in the near future. The reverse is true if, by bolting down a substantial percentage of investment goods there, the consumer goods sector is presently expanded. These thoughts underlie a very interesting model of economic development first propounded by the Soviet engineering economist G. A. Fel'dman in 1928 [7] 2 We are indebted to Professor Domar [6] for pointing out the significance of this model and for relating it to current growth theory as well as to the Soviet industrialization debate of the twenties. The same model has been independently formulated by the Indian statistician P. C. Mahalanobis [9] who places somewhat greater emphasis on making it operational enough to serve as a rough guide of sorts for Indian long term planning.3 In its simplest form this model splits an economy into two departments, investment and consumption. Investment goods are general ex ante and can be used to increase the capacity of either sector. But ex post, capital is specific to the